ELR Citation: ELR 20532
No(s). 84-6185-E (D. Or. May 17, 1985)

The court rules that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) registration process is not subject to the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and holds that the plaintiff did not exhaust the administrative remedies available under FIFRA in challenging the registration of seven herbicides. The court first holds that collateral estoppel is not applicable because the case on which the plaintiff relies addressed the separate issue of whether an agency proposing to use pesticides may rely on FIFRA registration as a substitute for preparation of an environmental impact statement. The court notes that other cases have consistently held that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations are exempt from NEPA requirements, including several cases specifically dealing with FIFRA registration. The court holds that FIFRA's process adequately fulfills the objectives of NEPA, and refuses to superimpose NEPA requirements on the FIFRA process. The court also holds that the plaintiff has failed to exhaust the administrative remedies under FIFRA, as he did not petition the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator to cancel or suspend registration of the challenged pesticides.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Ralph Bradley
Bradley and Gordon
1397 Williamette, Eugene OR 97401
(503) 343-8247

Michael Axline
School of Law, University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403
(503) 686-3823

Counsel for Defendants
Dorothy Burakreis
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 633-5390

Tom Lee
312 U.S. Courthouse, 620 S.W. Main St., Portland OR 97205
(503) 221-2153
David Rhoten
100 McNavy Square, 750 Front St. NE, Salem OR 97301
(503) 581-1551